Russia can play a positive role on the world stage
What would it take for the international community to welcome back Vladimir Putin? Would pressuring Bashar Al Assad to take early retirement at a villa on the Black Sea, say, do the trick? Such a scenario is not completely out of the question. In a recent interview, the Russian president refused to rule out granting asylum to the Syrian dictator. He may even have the power to enforce a premature departure. According to one report, when the two met in Moscow last October, Mr Putin told Mr Al Assad: “Go, or you’ll be made to go,” ordering his guest to start on the road towards a transitional government – or else.
Some quite understandably want to see a man who has acted so atrociously towards his own population hauled up in front of a court. But if giving him safe passage averts the death of thousands and helps bring an end to Syria’s civil war, it would surely be a price worth paying. Saudi Arabia’s willingness to take former president Zine Abidine Ben Ali into exile almost certainly helped Tunisia’s transition. If Mr Putin was similarly willing to take Mr Al Assad, most would thank him. But why, at the moment, should the Russian leader be keen to solicit the approval of leaders who make their disdain for him eminently clear? This week the president of Poland, Andrzej Duda, described Russia as a “looming menace” and warned against any easing of the sanctions imposed after the annexation of Crimea and the dest- abilisation of eastern Ukraine. This is why comments made by Japan’s prime minister, Shinzo Abe, in an interview with Nikkei and the Financial Times on Monday were so welcome. “We need the constructive engagement of Russia,” he said. “As chair of the G7, I need to seek solutions regarding the stability of the region as well as the whole world. I believe appropriate dialogue with Russia, appropriate dialogue with president Putin is very important.”
Mr Abe is absolutely right in calling for Russia to come in from the cold – or rather for the West, and the G7 (which was the G8 until Russia was ejected) to stop giving Mr Putin the cold shoulder. For if we are to find lasting solutions to a whole range of problems, Russia cannot be excluded.
Its role in Syria is central. The rest of the world needs its cooperation in the fight against ISIL not just in the Middle East, but also against lone wolves and new affiliates in other continents. As the Arctic’s ice melts, new sea lanes are opening and a scramble for resources and trade is not far off. As a major power with half the region’s population, it is in everyone’s interests that Russia plays a responsible role.
If there is ever to be meaningful reform at the United Nations, Russia – with its Security Council veto – will have to agree. Indeed, if any truly multilateral global institutions are to work effectively, Russia will have to be included and granted appropriate status and weight.
Russia can play a constructive role on the world stage – as it showed in the Iranian nuclear negotiations. For this to be the norm, rather than an instance of slightly unexpected cooperation from an often angry and vengeful ex-colleague, the federation needs to be openly invited; by turning the G7 back into the G8, for instance. Such moves will necessitate a degree of reticence by some and a very careful calibration of how to make these overtures publicly by others, American officials in particular. Barack Obama would have to be willing to take a hit domestically, as his many critics would undoubtedly assail him for failing to stand up to a leader they view as a ruthless autocrat. But it would be worth it if it led to a Russia whose first instinct was cooperation, not confrontation.
Mr Putin would probably welcome a diplomatic embrace too. He could present it at home as a triumph; and other countries should allow him to do so, because he needs a way out of his current situation. His popularity is incredibly high because of his aggressive foreign policy. While that dominates – and western leaders play into his narrative by constantly denouncing him, allowing him to present himself as the fearless defender of Mother Russia – the population appears to be willing to overlook the parlous state of the economy.
This may work in the short term, but it is not a strategy that can be sustained for long without dire consequences for nearby countries, including Ukraine. Indeed, the latter’s return to stability is the opposite of what Mr Putin currently wants, and it would serve that country well if he could be persuaded to work instead towards a peaceful and prosperous Ukraine.
In short, there is little to be lost and a huge amount to be gained in “appropriate dialogue”, as Mr Abe put it, and we should hope he follows through while he chairs the G7 this year. What about Crimea, it may well be asked? That land, unfortunately, is already lost. But would it have been taken had Russia – as Mr Putin and his supporters see it – not for years been isolated, humiliated and then threatened by the encroachment of Nato on its borders? Re-engagement with Russia is necessary and timely. But it needs to be done this time with respect for Russia’s history and for its sense of itself as a great power. The prizes would be numerous – and if Mr Al Assad leaving office is among them, so much the better.
Russia’s role in Syria is central. The rest of the world needs its cooperation